JRP3
Hyperactive Member
If you filter for the above mentioned inaccuracies Tesla is likely already number one.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
If you filter for the above mentioned inaccuracies Tesla is likely already number one.
If you filter simply for long range EVs (over 200 miles of range), i.e, the EVs that are disrupting the auto sector,
it's,
Tesla 103,000
Rest of World 25,000
She's back....
Ok, the engineer left months ago. Same with the engineer that moved to Uber's flying car division.
Please help me understand how this is breaking news??
ETA: That question wasn't directed at @kenliles
Not only is it again old news from Lora Kolodny of CNBC, but she did not take the necessary time or effort to properly supply us with explanations from the person who left or those from the company. I suspect it may have been mainly information and inspiration offered to her by someone with a vested interest in hurting Tesla. Or perhaps she has felt snubbed by Elon or someone else at Tesla.
It is hardly unusual for a person to leave after twelve years at one company. Perhaps he was drained, and fresh blood was needed to further develop the newer projects. Now he can again get involved with something right at its beginning.
Last edited:
Dennisj00
Member
I don’t watch or click on CNBC. Worthless information.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Have the comings and goings of various employees at any other company ever been under such scrutiny by the press?
What's needed for that and other news pieces with negative spins:
1) A company with a compelling new product and a charismatic CEO that attract eyeballs/clicks for news stories
2) Long established industries threatened with disruption by an innovative new competitor
3) A huge number of short sellers of a company's shares
4) A company that does not supply the lifeblood necessary for the media: advertising dollars
jhm
Well-Known Member
I don't want to filter the past. Just want Tesla to sell over 250k cars this year.
I never fuss over PHEVs. These will drop out of the market pretty fast as the price of batteries come down.
Awhile back I was looking at sales of electric buses in China. These were broken out by BEV, PHEV, and HEV. At first the hybrids dominated. Then the market figured out that a lot of money could be saved by plugging in. So sales of PHEV and BEV surged and hybrids virtually fell out of the market. Then BEVs surged and a year later PHEVs were on rapid decline. In the span of about 4 years, the market had figured out that BEVs provided the best value. BEVs overwhelmingly dominate the electric bus market in China.
Now this history was quite accelerated for electric buses in China. But I do expect the transition away from PHEVs to happen elsewhere and to happen quickly. We'll know that BEVs are poised for take off when this happens.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Fleet managers buy mostly on cold hard numbers. With a little fear of being very early adopters.
Retail customers buy on wants,fears, and desires. In addition to some numbers.
jhm
Well-Known Member
Right, that is why the transition is faster for buses. Also infrastructure for transit buses is limited to fixed routes. I view ICE range extenders as an accommodation to make use of gas stations as infrastructure. The combination of large batteries and high power charging will quickly make range extenders superfluous. So as the big batteries get sufficiently cheap and fast charger networks sufficiently built up, BEVs will leave PHEVs on the dust.
well done BEVs, like Teslas, have already left PHEVs in the dust with consumers. it will be quite a number of years until the incumbent automakers leave behind the ICE drivetrain, so, until then, an effective oligopoly in the automotive industry will mean lots of PHEV offerings from these incumbents despite consumer preference for Tesla quality BEVs.
in other words, there will be a many year gap between when we reach the tipping point in demand for long range EVs, and when we reach the tipping point in supply of these due to the effective oligopoly.
bdy0627
Active Member
Since we are nearing the end of the month, here is a Model 3 production update.
Using VIN data from this site: Tesla Model 3 VINs
The max number of Model 3 produced based upon VINs is now at 6,414. If we subtract 2017 production of 2,645, we are left with 3,769 for January. This is well ahead of my ramp projection for January. I estimated 2,800 for January, and 13,150 for Q1. If we give 5 weeks of production for January, this comes in at an average of 754 Model 3 produced per week for the month. I estimated that Tesla would end the month at a steady production rate of around 700/wk. According to this data, it is likely well above that. That supports the comments from Tesla in the investor meeting that they would be at 1,000/wk by the end of this month. Keep in mind that the data used here is the MAX number of Model 3 produced based upon VINs. The actual production number may well be lower. Still, this makes me optimistic for Tesla's ramp projections for Q1.
Using VIN data from this site: Tesla Model 3 VINs
The max number of Model 3 produced based upon VINs is now at 6,414. If we subtract 2017 production of 2,645, we are left with 3,769 for January. This is well ahead of my ramp projection for January. I estimated 2,800 for January, and 13,150 for Q1. If we give 5 weeks of production for January, this comes in at an average of 754 Model 3 produced per week for the month. I estimated that Tesla would end the month at a steady production rate of around 700/wk. According to this data, it is likely well above that. That supports the comments from Tesla in the investor meeting that they would be at 1,000/wk by the end of this month. Keep in mind that the data used here is the MAX number of Model 3 produced based upon VINs. The actual production number may well be lower. Still, this makes me optimistic for Tesla's ramp projections for Q1.
bdy0627
Active Member
One other note about the VIN numbers is that they jumped up a lot with the last number. Take a look at the sequence of total VINs as they became known:
2645 (2017)
3040
3460
3460
4757
6414
Note the huge jump with the last one in particular. It suggests that the ramp is starting to go more vertical over the last couple of weeks.
2645 (2017)
3040
3460
3460
4757
6414
Note the huge jump with the last one in particular. It suggests that the ramp is starting to go more vertical over the last couple of weeks.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
This is obvious.
But retail customers don't always respond rationally. I have said it before that if cars were purchased rationally every two car household in the industrialized world would have a LEAF by now.
I have a brother in law with two Tesla crazed sons. They kept shooting down reasons why not to get a Tesla. He finally said "I just like gas cars." And purchased an Infiniti instead of a Tesla.
Go to Volt forums. Many swore up and down that high AER PHEVs were the intermediate future for the next 30 years at least. Until the Bolt started arriving in numbers and they could not grasp why Bolt was outselling the Volt. Many love that they can reduce their gasoline consumption 50-99%. But can't let go of the gasoline station as security blanket as long as there are not 350 kWh fast chargers as ubiquitous as gasoline pumps are today. Even though they know 2/3 of Americans will be doing 90% of their charging at home and we don't need as many charging points as we have pumps.
Sometimes change is hard. Even if we want to and know the facts.
Edit: I was perusing Prius forums the other day. I started reading a thread on the Honda Clarity PHEV that has a 47 mile AER and 293 mile range on gas. Many Prius owners were aghast at buying a car with 340 mile range and having to fill up a 7 gallon tank every 293 miles on a road trip. They said it was like buying a short range BEV. They would consider a PHEV once it had a Prius like 600 miles of total range. Seriously.
Last edited:
mutle
Member
When buying the i3 I had the option of adding a range extender for around €4000 (because adding a second drive train, even if it doesn't drive the wheels, is quite expensive). I decided against it as with the €4000 I saved I could rent quite a few ICE cars if I really needed one. Four years later and I did not have to rent an ICE car even once (and I managed to drive the i3 to Norway and Italy from Germany). I also heard from some i3 owners who chose the range extender and most rarely use it. Since BMW increased the range of the battery pack the number of range extenders sold compared to pure BEVs is shrinking and at some point, probably around 200 miles of range, only a very small number of customers would even think that they need it (and most likely not need it in practice and skip the option on their next purchase).
FOX? Other news networks? Other TV networks? Other media companies?
There was quite a stir over #metoo recently, and I don't think it is over yet.
jhm
Well-Known Member
What I find interesting in these example is how PHEVs may be helping some consumers transition to BEVs. If your experience with a PHEV is that you rarely actually need the range extender, then your mind is open to the possibility that in your next car you just don't need it.
One advantage that fleet operators have is that they are buying new vehicles every year. So inbthe span of a year they can test out both a PHEV and BEV. If they find little advantage to the PHEV, then they are ready to embrace more BEVs in the following year. With consumers the cycle time is much slower, maybe one new car every 3 or 4 years. So on that basis it may take families 3 to 4 times as long transition from ICE/HEV to PHEV to BEV.
But even if some families need to try out PHEVs as a "gateway drug" to pure BEVs, it is good that sales of PHEVs are strong for now. The PHEV driver today may be the BEV driver in just a few years. So my point here merely goes back to the metrics for tracking EV sales. I am fine with including PHEVs in this EV market because I am confident that PHEVs are mostly transitional. It still points to a growing BEV market.
I would also point out that I believe the ability to plug in a car is a significant transition already. This exposes one to electricity as a lower cost and often more convenient fuel source. This is good environmentally and economically. To slow down the production of oil, we need competition with with electricity to drive down demand for motor fuels. This will keep fuel prices low, which will inhibit over investment in oil. PHEVs have a unique ability to switch fuels in a daily basis, so they can play a key role in expressing demand elasticity and forcing lower prices on fuels.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
But it paints an inaccurate picture of who is actually building BEV's. I don't like misleading data.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Auto companies paying top dollar to get a close look at the Model 3 inner workings:
Want the Scoop on Tesla’s Model 3? That Will Cost You $500,000
Want the Scoop on Tesla’s Model 3? That Will Cost You $500,000
Reciprocity
Active Member
Sometimes stocks just go down.. I know if you are new to the market since Trump and maybe you got tired of winning. Buy the dip. Not an advice.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Article
